Regarding the "deal". I understand Astroglide works much better

[Horse with no Name]

than Vaseline or KY Jelly.
We should be prepared.:silly:

[Walt Starr]

1. How would you have handled the nuclear showdown differently?

I keep hearing grandstanding from teh critics, yet no option is given other than blowing the whole thing up.

Tell me, what would you have done differently?

[Warpy]

4. This is, at best, a delaying tactic

by the right fringes and their "moderate" enablers. They get unacceptable judges rubber stamped, and the Dems get a solemn promise from proven crooks, liars and cheats.

The only good that can possibly come out of this is when the pubbies stab them in the back, probably over the first USSC nominee (who I think will be Bork). Their only recourse will be to walk out and shut the process down, while complaining loudly and at length how no Repuglican can ever be trusted to do what he's promised to do.

I'm not sure I'd have done this any differently because public perception is everything, and being dramatically stabbed in the back by a bunch of sanctimonious liars will be great theater. If they don't walk out when it happens, though, they will be telling the country that either they enjoy being betrayed, or that they're just there to collect their salaries, accrue their pensions, and enjoy great socialized medicine and to hell with the country.

[bloom]

10. Josh Marshall of TPM called it playing "Kick the Can"

the can is still there - it is just down the street a bit.

(on today's Democracy Now)

[Walt Starr]

16. The Civil War shaping up in the GOP tells a different srtory

Bush spends political capital like he spends budget surpluses. Before the end of summer, he'll be in the red in the political capital department.

What's he going to do then when formerly loyal Repugnants are looking at tanking approval ratings and a campaign in a year?

[Horse with no Name]

5. IF I believed that the pugs would be reciprocal and act in good faith

This would be a good deal.
However, their past actions have shown that they cannot be trusted.
All this did was delay the inevitable.
This group of centrists acted for, what they probably felt, the best interest of their jobs.
However, they WILL be reigned in and all that leaves is the Dems holding a worthless agreement with enough loopholes on this agreement to drive a truck through.
The GOP will, again, get their way when it is all said and done.

[Walt Starr]

8. These seven republicans will probably stand by their word

I guarantee you, you have an entirely new ad-hoc caucus within the Senate whenever a judicial nomination is on the floor.

These fourteen Senators now decide who goes up and who doesn't. These fourteen Senators will be in communication whenever a candidate is sent up.

More than likely, expect at least one nominee to be voted down plus expect another to be filibustered, the nuke option called for, and all seven republicans siding against Frist. That's how the civil war in the Republican Party is now guaranteed to go.

[paul_fromatlanta]

46. The deal is flawed, IMHO

The reason I thought the deal was flawed.

Suppose a Democrat is elected President and nominates a judge who is pro-choice.

Won't conservative senators come under great pressure to filibuster? And if a few Repubs do filibuster how can Dems who argued that closure is wrong on principle turn around and vote for closure... i.e. what is to stop a couple of Republican senators from undoing the deal after they get what they want in this term.

[Internut]

55. "These fourteen Senators now decide who goes up and who doesn't. "

Exactly. It used to be that the Democrats decided whom to filibuster. Now it is seven Democrats and seven Republicans who decide it. For some reason you feel that's a better deal.

[anarchy1999]

70. Thanks Walt for your analysis. Suddenly I feel more hopeful.

Utmost respect for your opinions, always held in very high regard around this household.

[mikehiggins]

7. That IS the option, Walt

That is the point. If Frist is serious enough to try and wreck the Senate then take the gloves off and stand up and fight.

Did those nominees suddenly become better, and more deserving of a lifetime judicial post? If stopping them wasn't worth the fight, then why bother in the first place.

Don't go off into a corner with Jo-mentum and come up with a "compromise" which gives the GOPukes what they want in exchange for nothing but empty promises.

Oh, boy, if the GOPukes don't live up what they promise they'll all look SOOOO bad! Everybody will know they are naughty, naughty liars!

Well, Walt, the families of a whole lot of dead people know the GOPukes are liars already. What they didn't know was whether or not the Democrats had the balls to stand toe-to-toe and fight it out on principle.

Apparently not. Another spineless, jellyfish exercise in Beltway politics. And you wonder why we can't beat these guys?

Its because we don't even try.

[Walt Starr]

13. Those nominees were worth the fight when you had 48 Democrats +1 Ind.

Now you have 44 Democrats + 1 Independent and the landscape is entirely different.

[CWebster]

23. Here it is , we are so weak, we are worthless

Is that what you just said?

[Walt Starr]

32. In a nuthsell, that pretty musch describes the situation

We don't have the votes.

Don't like it? Get off your ass and get at least six more Democratic Senators come next year's election.

[AuntPatsy]

11. Do you seriously believe compromise to be effective against

this machine that answers to no one? I beleive that five years of compromises to be more than enough. It has gotten to tbe point where they care not what the public thinks when they begin their campaigns that further thier agenda, whatever it might be...

I am just curious, I don't have your vast experience or knowledge of politics to be able to make myself heard loudly enough for my opinion to matter all that much. But watching this New Republican machine mow down our democracy these past five years without missing a beat begs me to question the intelligence to even give them an inch...

I have read your reasonings about looking at the long term picture, but I just don't see this bunch caring one iota about playing fair or even caring about what the majority of Americans view to be reasonable political byplays in our government as is seen in this day and age.

[Walt Starr]

19. Yes I do

Bush's numbers are tanking. He and his cronies were COUNTING ON GAIING A COMPLETE RUBBER STAMP IN THE SENATE!

Any hope whatsoever of that is now gone.

[geomon666]

21. But that's what he's going to get

A complete 'Bipartisan' rubber stamp for his judges now.

[Walt Starr]

30. Bullshit.

The three least objectioable will go through.

Wait and see on the rest.

[geomon666]

34. So the worst of the bunch will go through

but the others we're not so sure about? And that's a good thing?

[Ms. Clio]

35. They are not the "three least objectionable!!!"

Or, please explain just who is worse than Owen and Brown? I'm really curious?

[Walt Starr]

37. Pickering and Saad to name two.

And neither will be confirmed to the courts.

[geomon666]

38. You don't know that n/t

[Walt Starr]

40. Watch and learn n/t

[geomon666]

44. Excuse me?

Watch and learn? What gives you the right to be so condescending to me?

I've been watching. For 5 years I've been watching. Have you?

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ms. Clio]

39. This time

They, like Owen, will be back.

[Walt Starr]

41. Pcikering will never be back. Saad will not be filibustered

but will lose in an up or down vote.

[Ms. Clio]

42. Okay, we'll see

So that's 2 out of what, 10?

[Walt Starr]

47. And the option to filbuster O'Connor's replacement

This place will go nuts when nothing is done over Scalia's replacement after Scalia is confirmed as Chief Justice because DUers tend not to realize that replacing one rightwing nutball with another rightwing nutball is a zero sum game.

[geomon666]

49. You don't have that option.

That's an illusion. You don't think for an instant those 7 GOPers would side with Frist it came right down to it?

[Walt Starr]

50. They signed an agreement stating emphatically they would not go nuclear

Part II Section B of the agreement:

"Rules Changes. In light of the spirit and continuing commitments made in this agreement, we commit to oppose the rules changes in the 109th Congress, which we understand to be any amendment to or interpretation of the rules of the Senate that would force a vote on judicial nomination by means other than unanimous consent or Rule XXII."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/24/politics/24text.html

[geomon666]

52. And republicans are people of their word right? n/t

[Walt Starr]

54. Yes

These seven can be trusted at their word.

I guarantee you, every judicial nominee will start a meeting of this bipartisan judical caucus and the fourteen Senators willa gree how to proceed. They all signed their names to this agreement which could be contractually binding upon all of them.

[GOTV]

56. Me and Mike DeWine disagree with you

Mike DeWine:

"we of course reserve the right
to do what we could have done
tomorrow which is to cast a yes
vote for the constitutional
option."

Sounds like their very ready to go Nuclear. They only need to claim we filibustered under under less than extraordinary circumstances and they are released from their obligations.

[Walt Starr]

58. Gotta source?

Link please.

[GOTV]

60. link

http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=946

[Walt Starr]

61. Okay, after reading the whole thing

it's pretty clear that what I've been saying is what will happen.

These 14 Senators will be caucusing on each and every nomination.

[GOTV]

63. That may be...

but my point is that, at least DeWine, is not that emphatic. And he seems to feel he is speaking for the group when he expresses his willingness to go nuclear.

[Walt Starr]

65. Well, if the deal hadn't happened, the nuclear option would have happened

and these nominees would still be going through.

The HUGE difference is, there is no potential for a filibuster on O'Connor's replacement after the Fristians nuke the Senate.

[Internut]

66. The filibuster is dead either way -

If the seven Republicans don't think the nominee is extreme enough to warrant "extraordinary circumstances", they will not allow the filibuster or consider the deal broken and vote for the "nuclear" option. If they do agree that the nominee is extreme enough, filibuster is not needed, since they will just vote the nominee down.

Either way, saying that "the filibuster was saved" is disingenuous at best.

[Internut]

57. You conveniently forget that their "emphatic"

statement is contingent on Democrats not filibustering except in "extraoridinary circumstances" ("in light of the spirit an continuing commitments").

Here is a scenario. Democrats decide to filibuster, claiming "extraordinary circumstances". Two or three of the seven Republican senators involved in the deal use (as they are allowed to by the deal) their "individual discretion" to decide that these are not "extraordinary circumstances". Thus - either no filibuster or the deal is over.

[Walt Starr]

Democrats need 3 of the 7 who singed the agreement to be able

to filibuster. The Republicans need 2 of the 7 who signed the agreement to go nuclear.

Those seven Democrats will be caucusing with the seven Republicans on each and every nomination. They must do this to insure the agreement stays in place

I guarantee it.

[Internut]

62. You "guarantee" that when

the seven Democrats decide that the nominee is extreme enough to warrant "extraoridinary circumstances", the seven Republicans will agree?

Wow. The powers of prophecy were not lost - they are concentrated in Walt Starr.

How about this. I counter-guarantee that the seven Democrats, if they see that their Republican counterparts are not willing to go along with the "extraoridinary circumstances" that the Democrats thing exist, will cave in and let the nominee through, using the agreement as the excuse.

[Walt Starr]

64. No, I guarantee these 14 Senators will be caucusing

None of them want this thing to blow up.

[Internut]

68. Right. And this is what "caucusing together" means:

A nominee is put forth. Democrats say he is extreme. Republicans say he is not. Democrats say "we will filibuster". The seven "compromise" Democrats sound out their Republican counterparts. The Republican "compromise" senators say "we do not agree that extreme circumstances exist". Democratic "compromise" senators, in order not to break the deal, vote for cloture. End of caucus. The nominee goes on to the up/down vote in the Senate.

[Walt Starr]

72. OR another scenario

Democrats say exterme circumstances. 4 of 7 Republicans agree. Filibuster ensues, no nukes.

[Internut]

74. Huh? Your math is wrong.

Democrats say extreme circumstances. 4 of 7 Republicans agree. Filibuster ensues. Frist calls for a "nuclear option". 2 of seven Republicans (the ones who disagreed) go along with Frist and the rest of the Republicans, because they consider that the Democrats broke the agreement. Cheney casts the deciding vote. Boom.

[GOTV]

75. And thus...

... the filibuster remains in a persistant vegetative state - but at least it's not dead!

[GOTV]

59. It's as easy as that! n/t

[Internut]

79. I believe Warner disagrees with you

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,157576,00.html

Warner: ...To use an example, we simply unscrewed the fuse. But that fuse can be put back in if we detect that it's not extraordinary circumstances, but we're back to where the Democrats begin to trot out and do a leadership-led type of series of filibusters.

At that point, senators, seven senators of which I was one, any one or more of them may say, "Time out. I'm not satisfied that this is extraordinary circumstances as a matter of good conscience. I'm going to give leader Bill Frist the vote." And then Frist can ascertain whether or not he wants to use that constitutional measure

[bleedingheart]

15. I would not have compromised, I would rather have let the fascists

use the nuclear option and show themselves for what they are....

Backing off like the Dems did seems just so wrong. The Senate is supposed to be a place where the minority has a voice and if we can't have a voice then we are screwed...

I think we need to let the republicans take as much rope and ground as they want by force and let them hang themselves with it..

[Walt Starr]

17. So you would rather hand over abslute power to Bush

rather than cut a deal.

Damn, I'm glad YOU'RE not a Senator.

:eyes:

[OldLeftieLawyer]

26. Guess what?

He's already got absolute power, and he's had it since 9/11/2001.

Do you realize that he's not yet exercised his veto power? Not once.

He'll use it on the stem cell research bill, and that will be the first time.

That's because our elected Democrats are spineless cowards who squeal and squeak and run away and live to be sodomized (and us with them) another day.

[Walt Starr]

31. So all you have is hyperbolic rhetoric

He doesn't have absolute power because seven members of his own party hamstringed him.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

51. You don't recognize cold, hard facts

What one earth do you mean by "hyperbolic rhetoric," besides the fact that you might have hurt yourself typing those two words?

Check the facts on vetos, and then go look up "hyperbole."

If you think those seven members "hamstringed" him - whatever that means - you aren't watching closely enough.

That's the problem with Democrats - the innocents among us take at face value what they see, and they believe that's all it is, while smarties like Karl Rove run rings around us and then pound our heads with hammers while we're being sodomized.

Was that, maybe, "hyperbolic rhetoric," toots?

[Walt Starr]

67. "Guess what?

He's already got absolute power, and he's had it since 9/11/2001."

Like I said, hyperbolic rhetoric.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

69. Deny it

Prove to me that he's had less than absolute power.

Show me where he hasn't gotten anything he wanted.

Show me. Go on. Demonstrate. Quote. Show me.

You can't.

Now, behave.

[Walt Starr]

73. Um. Monday just proved you wrong

He didn't get teh filibuster removed for all time.

and that's just once.

Stem cells went through.

More questions about his Patriot Act.

The list will continue as his numbers are tanking and he has not solidified absolute power to force everybody into line.

In fact, he loses power daily because he's already spent all of his political capital and is into deficit spending on a lame duck term.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

76. That's all right

If you're shortsighted enough to think that what happened Monday was in any way final or definitive, you're looking at things from a perspective with which I'm not familiar. Thankfully.

The stem cell bill will be vetoed, or did you not read my post about GWB and his never having to use the Presidential veto power? Is that it?

You really are living in an odd bubble.

Just quote me one defeat - as I've asked before - that Bush got. So far, you've not been able to do it.

But, against the advice of others, I've responded to you here. I'm going to close now, and hope you get the chance to watch - perhaps with a more open mind - what's been going on in Washington since 2000. And, I wish you the best of luck.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

71. Never mind

Best of luck to you and Pogo..............

[ewagner]

2. We didn't have the votes

to stop the nuclear option.....we may have just delayed Frist's use of the option but apparently we got agreements from some Repubs to vote against at least some of the judges....

It's not a "go dance in the streets" type of victory. But like my Daddy used to say, "It's better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick."

[OldLeftieLawyer]

3. And now we have Priscilla Owens

She's been confirmed.

She really is one of my worst nightmares. Everyone should be very, very concerned about her. The other two are almost as bad.

I could be wrong.

They could be worse, but it's hard to imagine anyone worse for the bench than the lunatic to which we just gave a nominal pass.

[ewagner]

6. Make no mistake

about my dislike for Owens.....but we would have been stuck with her one way or the other....

[OldLeftieLawyer]

9. I don't know about that

She got a pass. That's hardly what she deserved. There is nothing guaranteeing anyone this so-called (and now, somehow, sacred) "up and down vote."

I'd have been happy to watch her stay in limbo for another several years. Buying time, that's all it would have been.

So, no, I don't agree that she would have been confirmed. Not at all.

[Horse with no Name]

14. Yeah but I would rather her be confirmed over a firestorm

than by laying down a flowered mat for her to walk across.
Sometimes sticking to your principles is not easy and you do lose.
If you aren't willing to stand and fight, why bother showing up.

[WilliamPitt]

12. Your choices were

Owens and the removal of the filibuster, or Owens and the retention of the filibuster.

That's it. Period. Hate it, but that's how it is.

[ewagner]

18. Succinctly put....n/t

[geomon666]

20. There is no retention though Will

If they can just remove it at will, you don't really have it do you? So then what was the point of all this again?

[WilliamPitt]

22. If they could 'remove it at will'

they would have by now. It took weeks of ginning up this crunch, in defiance of the poll numbers. If they want to try and slap it down, they will cause a full-fledged war within the GOP ranks, and will be going back on their publicly-given word.

No, it isn't etched in stone. But the cost of getting rid of it after this deal will be intolerably high.

[geomon666]

24. Who is going to hold them accountable for it?

If they break their word (which they never gave and I haven't seen it anywhere), who is going to hold them accountable?

[Ms. Clio]

36. The same folks who are holding them accountable for the Iraqi war

Oh.

[GOTV]

28. It could be easily done...

... with the blessings of the voters.

The compromise provides the tools.

[ewagner]

45. The real value of the compromise

is that 7 Repubs signed it who can prevent Frist from pulling the nuclear trigger at will.....

Frist can bluster and threaten all he wants but for the time being, he doesn't have the votes to kill the filibuster.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

25. Too simple

Within that black-and-white (and narrow) vision lies a world of nuance.

The first one that comes to mind is how this would have been a fine opportunity for Democrats to grow a backbone.

Far beyond the ramifications of the shameful passes those three ill-qualified nominees received lies the plain truth - that the Democrats caved, got nothing, and gave away three free passes.

Wouldn't it have been nice to put up a fight and go at it? Wouldn't it have been nice not to bend over yet again?

[GOTV]

27. No,

The choice was more like owens, removal of the filibuster and we stand by our principles or owens, removal of the filibuster and we abandon our principles.

[CWebster]

29. Oh, he filibuster is still on the table

to be used in the next round.

But wait! We have a plan--we will give the candidates a pass and then they won't take it away from us!!!

And we will celebrate our victory!!

[AuntPatsy]

77. After reading this whole thread once more. I still cannot have

faith that this compromise will not end up a defeat. I understand why you believe it to be logical in the scheme of things, but again, considering how this group works, one cannot put faith in the fact that these senators can be counted on to hold true to their word regarding the rest of the nominees not being confirmed..

And seriously. I am not at all convinced that allowing Owen in will not come back and bite us and hard.

[LuPeRcALiO]

33. But shutting down the senate might have interfered

with the President's second-term agenda.

Now we can get right to work on important legislation like Social Security reform and making the tax cuts permanent!

:sarcasm:

[GOTV]

43. As long as we fight for the Bush agenda...

... we can keep declaring victory!

Apparently, conceding loss in an honorable fight is too high a price to pay.

[OldLeftieLawyer]

53. Remember Clinton calling Gingrich's bluff?

He let the government get shut down rather than cave to Newt's threats.

That was a work of art. Too bad no Democrats today are willing to go to the mat for principle - but would rather take a defeat and wave it around, trying to get us to believe it's a victory.

[AuntPatsy]

78. Such should have been implimented once again considering what

can occur now that these three have been let through the net.